Trudy Metzger/Steve Stutzman

[mike]

It’s disheartening. It is disheartening to be thrown into a scenario when everyone suspects you of lying about the most horrific thing you’ve ever experienced.

Maybe everyone suspects a victim of lying. I don't know. But it is extremely important to know what is true before a person's life is forever changed by accusations of abuse. Abuse forever alters a person's life. False allegations also forever alter a person's life. Truth is extremely important. And it is not always easy to find.

[joshuabgood]

It’s disheartening. It is disheartening to be thrown into a scenario when everyone suspects you of lying about the most horrific thing you’ve ever experienced.

Maybe everyone suspects a victim of lying. I don't know. But it is extremely important to know what is true before a person's life is forever changed by accusations of abuse. Abuse forever alters a person's life. False allegations also forever alter a person's life. Truth is extremely important. And it is not always easy to find.

False accusations are horrible. A wise person though can also acknowledge that (whatever the precise statistics are) false accusations are significantly less likely than are true allegations. And that knowledge, should also inform how we discern through a situation. I myself don't know of one single instance where a false accusation was made of this abusive sort. But I know of too many of the other sort...and usually despite it feeling unbelievable and like we knew the person, it's true.

My closest experience with false allegations is about 15 years ago, in a secular context a person whom I supervised began to tell other people that we had something going on and that I was *looking* at them inappropriately in a professional setting. The knowledge that they were saying this around came from a person who 'thought I should know." I immediately reported it to my then supervisor, who advised me to just sit tight and be careful. That didn't feel right to me so I got another opinion from my workplace mentor and based on their advice I chose to formally self-report it for formal investigation as an allegation of workplace harassment to the EEOC with me being the subject of the inquiry (an independent federal agency that enforces civil rights laws against workplace harassment. (My supervisor wasn't happy with me, but looking back I am glad I did.) They thoroughly investigated and judged it unfounded, and in addition, uncovered a bunch of similar harassing statements the person had made about another individual the year before prior to me even being at the workplace.

In a very small way, I know how scary it feels...on the other hand, I wasn't that scared as I knew there was no "there" there.

All that said, besides victim testimony, in many cases there are other concerning patterns, ie trips to places alone with other people's children, where a wise person I think can make a discernment.

[JohnH]

As a survivor, it’s extremely disorienting and horrifying to be abused by so called “Christians”. It’s even more horrifying to suddenly find the worst experience of your life being dissected for the purpose of finding out if you’re “lying”. I cannot describe the horror of this experience adequately, but I’ve often said that I’d rather be a murder victim than a rape victim.

Therapists are not investigators; however, due to how trauma is stored in our brains, especially when trauma happens to us as young kids, that trauma can resurface later in life when we are in a more safe environment. This sometimes happens in therapy. Sometimes it happens when the victims moves away from their childhood home/community. It is actually quite normal for 30-40 year olds to suddenly not be okay mentally, due to trauma memories surfacing.

There really aren’t many perfect abuse cases in terms of “evidence”. Children don’t always tell right away - for many reasons. Even if a rape kit is done immediately after a rape, that kit takes a long time to process.

Survivors are put through the wringer in both churches and the legal system. Professional investigators need to do their job, but again - that takes time. Even then, the investigator may not be able to find physical evidence of a crime, though they believe the crime to have happened as the survivor said.

It’s disheartening. It is disheartening to be thrown into a scenario when everyone suspects you of lying about the most horrific thing you’ve ever experienced.

I think of Jesus. He chose to come to earth as a baby, not a king. Not an adult. He lived with nothing. He didn’t have a house. He chose to associate with the lowly. He chose the side with less power every single time. Those in power hated him for it, and that’s one of the reasons He ended up on the cross.

It would do us well to follow His example.

None of this changes the fact that "simply believe any accusation someone makes" is not a reasonable way to conduct things. I don't want to see victims put through the wringer either. However, what is there to stop a statement like this?

As JohnH, I accuse anndet92 of unspeakable evil acts.

Since I am now a victim, you have to believe me.

It is is simply not true that this doesn't happen, and in particular the first people to rush to take advantage of this would be perpetrators themselves - something I have already seen happen.

[mike]

All that said, besides victim testimony, in many cases there are other concerning patterns, ie trips to places alone with other people's children, where a wise person I think can make a discernment.

Most definitely. In many of these situations, there were red flags everywhere. In a recent case, a person accused (not yet convicted) spent many hours, for years, operating farm equipment with other people's children in the cab. Where was the discernment of everyone else all this time?

[anndet92]

As a survivor, it’s extremely disorienting and horrifying to be abused by so called “Christians”. It’s even more horrifying to suddenly find the worst experience of your life being dissected for the purpose of finding out if you’re “lying”. I cannot describe the horror of this experience adequately, but I’ve often said that I’d rather be a murder victim than a rape victim.

Therapists are not investigators; however, due to how trauma is stored in our brains, especially when trauma happens to us as young kids, that trauma can resurface later in life when we are in a more safe environment. This sometimes happens in therapy. Sometimes it happens when the victims moves away from their childhood home/community. It is actually quite normal for 30-40 year olds to suddenly not be okay mentally, due to trauma memories surfacing.

There really aren’t many perfect abuse cases in terms of “evidence”. Children don’t always tell right away - for many reasons. Even if a rape kit is done immediately after a rape, that kit takes a long time to process.

Survivors are put through the wringer in both churches and the legal system. Professional investigators need to do their job, but again - that takes time. Even then, the investigator may not be able to find physical evidence of a crime, though they believe the crime to have happened as the survivor said.

It’s disheartening. It is disheartening to be thrown into a scenario when everyone suspects you of lying about the most horrific thing you’ve ever experienced.

I think of Jesus. He chose to come to earth as a baby, not a king. Not an adult. He lived with nothing. He didn’t have a house. He chose to associate with the lowly. He chose the side with less power every single time. Those in power hated him for it, and that’s one of the reasons He ended up on the cross.

It would do us well to follow His example.

None of this changes the fact that "simply believe any accusation someone makes" is not a reasonable way to conduct things. I don't want to see victims put through the wringer either. However, what is there to stop a statement like this?

As JohnH, I accuse anndet92 of unspeakable evil acts.

Since I am now a victim, you have to believe me.

It is is simply not true that this doesn't happen, and in particular the first people to rush to take advantage of this would be perpetrators themselves - something I have already seen happen.

You’re right that perps rush to make themselves the victim, but usually there’s a power difference involved. (Adult/child, adult/teen, pastor/church member). Pay attention to which party has more power.

I am not saying false allegations do not happen. They do, but it’s rare. We’ve went over statistics before. Reported abuse cases that end up being false allegations are not an every day occurrence. If you add in the many cases that never get reported, the number of false allegations goes down even more.

Is it possible to start from the premise of believing victims since the data points that direction? Because if we start there, we are going to get it right between 90-99% of the time! (Depends on the studies you are basing the numbers off of).

Obviously, as time goes on, and the investigative process takes place, there may be a shift in one’s final judgment.

As Joshua Good referenced, there’s often other signs that someone is an abuser. Sometimes it’s a gut feeling that something is really, really “off”. Understanding how abusers think and how they deceive can help us be more informed and better at protecting children.

I’ll again end this comment with the sentiment that I acknowledge that the majority of people in this forum want to protect children and prevent abuse from happening. I circle back to this because it’s easy to forget what we are really discussing.

[I Timothy]

I don't know what all Trudy knows about others. But regarding Steve in her post, if the allegation about DD is accurate, the conduct described would generally fit Pennsylvania's legal definition of indecent assault, not s.x assault. That isn't minimizing what happened, indecent assault is still a serious s.x offense. But legal definitions matter because different offenses have different statutory elements and penalties. We can acknowledge the seriousness of the conduct while also using the correct legal terminology.
[/quote]

It wasn’t in PA; the state did attempt to get an indictment but ultimately was ima me to bring the case to trial, despite his recorded and written confession. Grand jury proceedings aren’t public so I don’t know the exact charge they brought.
[/quote]

So another situation in which the legal system doesn't have enough evidence to prosecute so it is taken to social media to litigate?

[JohnH]

I am not saying false allegations do not happen. They do, but it’s rare. We’ve went over statistics before. Reported abuse cases that end up being false allegations are not an every day occurrence. If you add in the many cases that never get reported, the number of false allegations goes down even more.

10% (although I think the actual number is higher) is not "rare". That's quite a bit. I am not comfortable with innocent people getting railroaded 10% of the time.

Cases that don't get reported make the false allegations even more significant, not less, because that's how statistics work. If true reports aren't made, then the reports that are made get a bigger share of the false reports.

Is it possible to start from the premise of believing victims since the data points that direction? Because if we start there, we are going to get it right between 90-99% of the time! (Depends on the studies you are basing the numbers off of).

No, it isn't possible to start from a premise that we just have to believe anything someone says because of the nature of what they say. Consider what I said earlier:

As JohnH, I accuse anndet92 of evil, unspeakable acts, with me as a victim.

Since I am a victim by my own self-report, you have to believe all victims. Therefore, my report must be beleived.

Obviously, as time goes on, and the investigative process takes place, there may be a shift in one’s final judgment.

As Joshua Good referenced, there’s often other signs that someone is an abuser. Sometimes it’s a gut feeling that something is really, really “off”. Understanding how abusers think and how they deceive can help us be more informed and better at protecting children.

I’ll again end this comment with the sentiment that I acknowledge that the majority of people in this forum want to protect children and prevent abuse from happening. I circle back to this because it’s easy to forget what we are really discussing.

Yes, and part of that duty to protect children is to not start from a position that victims are somehow (a) responsible to make the reports and allegations - they aren't, and (b) that just blindly believing any allegation somehow makes things better.

Pushing hard for this will simply create scenarios where false allegations end up happening, which makes people very bitter and much LESS likely to believe victims in the future. Is that really what you want? The right way to do this is to consider evidence of things besides just alleged victim self-reports, such as:

- Actually check the backgrounds of newcomers, particularly ones who come from other church backgrounds - why, exactly, did they leave? What claims have been made against them? (This would have caught Harold Herr.)
- Inspect the legal history of people installed into positions of leadership in church/school. (This would have caught Leroy Miller.)
- Establish guidelines and safeguards for proper conduct vs improper conduct. For example, a man should not be taking assorted children unrelated to him on long, multi-day trips with nobody else present.
- Anabaptists like to do things in groups - big groups, with lots of family around. There is almost never a reason for children to be alone with people other than their parents. Someone who creates such a situation needs to be viewed with suspicion.
- Conducting ministries to children at risk, like "city ministry", needs special care as many of the children in those situations have been abused and are vulnerable to being abused again.
- Repeat offenders who get caught protecting perpetrators need permanently removed from positions of leadership and influence.

As far as claiming abuse allegations are rarely false, that's not the case in the most common type of allegation - ones that come up in divorce proceedings, which are estimated to be around 50% false. You need to acknowledge the reality that people will take advantage of making false allegations if doing so benefits themselves.

[JohnH]

I don't know what all Trudy knows about others. But regarding Steve in her post, if the allegation about DD is accurate, the conduct described would generally fit Pennsylvania's legal definition of indecent assault, not s.x assault. That isn't minimizing what happened, indecent assault is still a serious s.x offense. But legal definitions matter because different offenses have different statutory elements and penalties. We can acknowledge the seriousness of the conduct while also using the correct legal terminology.

It wasn’t in PA; the state did attempt to get an indictment but ultimately was ima me to bring the case to trial, despite his recorded and written confession. Grand jury proceedings aren’t public so I don’t know the exact charge they brought.

So another situation in which the legal system doesn't have enough evidence to prosecute so it is taken to social media to litigate?

Dude, the guy made a recorded and written confession of what he did. I heard the confession myself, and you can go read his written confession yourself on Trudy's latest blog post. I really don't know why the grand jury didn't indict. It is entirely reasonable for his conduct to be taken to social media, simply in order to protect others, particularly as he racked up multiple victims.

I'd like to know what would be enough to convince some people. The situation with that particular offender hurt many people. It became obvious that certain people, particularly Steve Stutzman, took steps to prevent stopping it, and were profiting from the situation - in Stutzman's case, to the tune of thousands of dollars. I think that's very, very wrong, and Stutzman needs to repent and take proper accountability by stepping back from ministry and leadership and go find something else useful to do.

[Grace]

Timothy" post_id=310290 time=1784315898 user_id=6578]

So another situation in which the legal system doesn't have enough evidence to prosecute so it is taken to social media to litigate?

Facebook, Blogs, even Mennonet is social media. So, you are right, there wasn't enough evidence for law enforcement to prosecute so it has been taken to social media for a litigation by the people. Not saying it is right or wrong, but a fact.

[Neto]

Did anyone read the data I mentioned in a previous post? [See below these new comments.]

I was shocked to see that 25% of people who were falsely accused and later exonerated due to DNA test results had confessed, and 10% had pleaded guilty. (Please read below, in case my wording here might be giving the wrong impression about the data.)

What are we to conclude from this sort of results? Do we just assume that they were so guilty in other cases that they actually didn't know that they were innocent of the specific charges that brought them into court? Did they have so little confidence that they would be believed that they just automatically gave up confronting the false charges against them?

I have an unpleasant memory of having my uncle & aunt look at me in a strange way that I didn't understand. It was only many years later, after hearing about child abuse that I began to wonder if they thought I was doing something inappropriate with my cousin. It happened when I was probably 18 or 19, making my cousin about 2 years old. She climbed up in my lap and was bouncing on me. I have had this feeling other times since then, that someone was assuming that I was doing something wrong, when I wasn't. In those later cases I had more of a sense of what I thought the other people were thinking, but I never said anything, because denying something would seem to indicate that I was actually guilty of what I suspected they were projecting on me. How can this be avoided? As I mentioned some place here, I really love children (always have) but am afraid to talk to others' children (like at church services), because of a fear of someone thinking I am doing something inappropriate, like 'grooming' the child (to trust me).

I guess I grew up 'sheltered', because I didn't know about stuff like s3xual abuse. After hearing about it, I have realized that a girl I knew in public school (especially the grades 4 through 8) almost certainly was being or had been abused by someone, possibly her father, or an older brother. (In 5th grade she sat across the isle from me in one class, and she drew a picture of a naked girl and held it out for me to see. I will not tell what she did when we were in 8th grade art class. I only began to learn about such things when I was a Junior in college, when a friend and roommate told me that he had been abused by a school coach when he was in (as I recall) Jr High. Then around that same time a former practicing homosexual spoke in a chapel meeting.

I am perhaps being overly 'transparent' here, and may later wish that I didn't write this stuff out in such a public place. I'm just trying to explain in some small way what it must feel like to be falsely accused.


[EDIT TO ADD:
In the summer after my Freshman year of college, I was a counselor at our MB district's church camp. My responsibilities were to teach Bible classes and to be the only adult in a cabin with boys who were attending the camp. In both situations there was no other adult in these groups. (The Bible study was mixed, both boys and girls, and the cabin was of course only boys.]

....
The following is an interesting read, but too long to quote in its entirety here. I will quote just two short sections:

https://facecampusequality.org/resource ... lt-reports

The only way to identify the guilty while protecting the innocent from the injustices of wrongful allegations is to determine the truth in each case through the rigorous application of due process.

Evidence of Wrongful Sexual Misconduct or Assault Allegations
As stated before, whether wrongful allegations are deliberate, misguided, or misremembered is irrelevant to those accused and innocent. They have been implicated for something they did not do and will suffer the traumatic consequences.

Innocence Project. Numerous innocent people have been wrongfully accused and convicted of crimes and then exonerated based on new evidence, such as DNA. As of 2020, the vast majority of DNA exonerations (about 91%) were for those wrongfully accused and convicted of sexual assault. Although these individuals were innocent of the crime, approximately 25% confessed, and 10% pleaded guilty. Research Resources - Innocence Project INNOCENCE PROJECT: DNA EXONERATIONS, 1989-2014: REVIEW OF DATA AND FINDINGS FROM THE FIRST 25 YEARS

(Emphasis mine. I found this statement to be very surprising. I would never have anticipated a finding along these lines.)